Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Out of cycle update.
[00:00:03] And so it begins. Cryptotalk Fm. My name is Leister, I'm your host. I'm providing the episode that I promised. Extended episode. This will be a little bit lengthy, although I do have a time limit.
[00:00:16] It's somebody gonna be showing up here in 2 hours, 15 minutes as I record it. So I want to get this done as quickly as I can, but there's a lot to cover, so you ought to bear with me. And a lot of other things came to roost that brought to my attention yesterday, and I want to talk about some of those. Some stuff came early this morning. I want to talk about those because I do think in a slight bit way, it's kind of all interconnected, and I'm going to be sharing not only what I'm reading, but also my personal exposure to some of this. There's not going to be anything that is, you know, dirt. Right. But I have reason to believe that some of the coverage that I did on Cryptotalk FM may have contributed to the downfall of these actors. It's possible, I can't say for sure, but it's possible because I did expose a lot of different things at different points in the process, and I'll talk about those. First, I want to just level set.
[00:01:14] I am going to be naming one person and his coverage in criticism because he did a video, a hurried video. When this all started to spread, about an hour and a half long, he took a victory lap, and then he started talking about random crap. It's fine. It's his channel. What I have a beef with is the fact that he did not contribute some sort of apology around his not involvement, but his exposure and the fact that followers came to him largely because of these bad actors and his, at the time, heavy hype and shill of said project.
[00:02:00] Now, to be fair, he was an investor like anybody else. He wasn't paid by them, he wasn't compensated. None of that is true. I'm saying I would have expected, and this is my expectation then didn't have to do it. But it's my expectation he would have led in the conversation by apologizing for his adamant defense of some of the bad actors named in this indictment that I'll be discussing. He also front loaded and I would argue to talk to maybe about 30 minutes ish about the good stuff, and then, you know, 47 minutes or whatever about the stuff nobody cared about. I felt if you're going to do an episode, you should leave the good stuff for last is just an opinion. But also, the vast majority of the show should focus on the content for which the title is presented. And the fake thumbnail. That's just my personal taste. It's his channel. He could do whatever he's going to do. He would say, I know. You know, we're all grown ups. We don't need to be cry baby bitches. We all take these risks. You, you know, do your own research. He would give the usual platitudes and lines of designed to deflect away from the statements and the facts that I am going to have to call out, because I'm a straight shoe in the world of sensitivity. And I think it's important we all together learn around how we avoid garbage. You've heard me. If you listen for a while, and if you haven't listened for a while, welcome. But you've heard me say, I try to avoid garbage. I was in Saitama, but my involvement in Saitama was strictly as an investor.
[00:03:33] I did basic warning and caution coverage leading up to the failed November 13 Vegas event. I did coverage around how buggy the application was. Like my coverage specifically was. I'm seeing red flag. It was Klaxons. Every episode was a klaxon. Wee wee. Every episode was a klaxon of some kind or a caution, a cautionary tale. Because I saw a bunch of garbage. And then the whole Christina nonsense and the cults and everything else was, I see this is not what it's appearing to be, and I don't think it's going to go very well.
[00:04:11] So that's the contrast, and I hope people saw that. And I do have a playlist called the Saitama saga if you want to check that out, with everything that I've done. But if you check that playlist out, I think it's pretty crystal clear.
[00:04:25] At no point was I shilling, pitching, or otherwise heavily hyping Saitama. I instead was trying to tell people, I I see problems here, and unless we fix these problems, I don't think this is going to be successful in the long term.
[00:04:43] All the way back and again, I connected the dots all the way back through the AMA's that they would present. This is an AMA. We're gonna. You can ask us anything. And then he would never take any hard questions. This is the cult leader I referred to, the preview of the failed November 13 Vegas event. I did two days prior to this, and I said, here's what you need to watch out for if you're gonna do this business and express some concerns.
[00:05:07] I drew parallels to Keanu Inu, which was very similar in what it did in the run up. And the ironic is the person for which I will described later was involved in that project as well, for the same reason I talked about cytomask and failures of the cytomask and the bugs that I saw. I talked about the failure with Cyta realty and the issues I saw there.
[00:05:30] I did my quarterly status at timeline. Pretty much every last one was critical. The lack of getting v two tokens and on and on and on, and then the cult rise of the cult, connecting it to Lillian, the failures of Lillian finance and its rush to uniswap and everything that was going wrong that I saw.
[00:05:46] Arguably the only coverage I did that you might consider positive. And I know this sounds bad, but I want to just. This is what I'm trying to emphasize, how I was coming at it compared to everybody else. The only one that even remotely came across as positive was when they did an outreach on Twitter and they asked people to spread the word about an OKX listing and the fact that OKX said, hey, all right, we need your community, and come on, show your support.
[00:06:17] Okay. I thought it was stupid because if you wanted to list them, you could list them. It's all scam. But I still put that out in some messaging to let people know if this is something you're interested in, then it's out there because people don't know. Cause they're not following fricking Twitter. Right. They're not on telescamous. So I was trying to help people that are outside of the bubble, at least be aware, because I knew the devs sucked at it. Other than that, I was largely not, I would argue, not at all positive about Satama, despite being an investor. Did I make some money? Yeah, but nowhere near what I likely could have. But at the time, my money situation was slim. I had nowhere near the amount of inbound I, you know, capital and capability to invest in projects that I do now. Like, it's not even close, I think. Yeah. So you're figuring this launched, what, q two of 2021?
[00:07:15] I didn't get awareness of it until. Yeah, probably about June, July, maybe July ish. 2021 is when I got aware of it. I don't remember how I got aware of it. I believe it was the Shibdez Reddit, if I think back. Okay, so. All right, I'll take a look at it. I saw the price. It's climbing like crazy. Pretty much every day, this thing was going up slightly, and then every month, it was going up crazy. And I said, all right, I'll toss a little bit of money in there. But the reason I didn't invest significant is the gas. Ethereum gas was out of crazy whack. There was no logic to what it was doing. The gas I referred to, I understand now, in hindsight, what was going on. But at the time, it didn't make any sense because I would try to do $100 trade on the Saitama business. And they want $100 of gas. Well, that's not going to fly. Right. It doesn't work for me, brother. So I bought little bits when I saw the gas would kind of settle down to a reasonable state. But again, I was not at a position to dump significant monies into this thing. And to be fair, I was more invested in Shibdeh at the time and a couple of other ones, but mostly shib. So I didn't want to move money from Shiv because I suspect it would go up. Of course, I ended up selling out a shiv to get into para, which was a terrible project, and then ship climb. So that was my. That was one of my lessons learned early on, is all right. I've got to be. I've got to be confident if I'm going to sell my project. I've got to be confident it's the right thing to do at the right time, because I don't want to have what seems to always happen. And I think people listening to me have had at least one situation. You know, you get into a project and it seems like it's not climbing and it'll go months, and it seems like it's not going anywhere. So you sell out of it. You get into another one that looks like it's got some potential. And then this other one rockets up. That happened quite a couple of times in my early trading days. And Shib was one of those. It was. It was not climbing like I thought it should at the time. But then when it got to the coinbase listing, obviously hit rocket ship. But by that point, I had largely sold out, back to saitama now. So I get aware of it. I dump a few. You know, it wasn't a lot of money. I would argue it was less than five figures, for sure. It wasn't a lot of money. Probably less than four figures, now that I think about it, because of the gas. The gas is holding me back. I just simply was not justifying paying that much gas for how much money I was willing to invest in this business.
[00:09:40] All right, so I take a step back. I just let it kind of marinate and see what's happening. And then I get inklings about what they're going to do at what would become or be termed the failed November 13 Vegas event, where they're, they do the Times Square and they do an advertisement in Times Square. And I remember at the advertisement and they sent images of this on social media. They were claiming, you will be able to download this wallet called Cytomask. You will. That was the words. It was on the banner. You will be able to download it at the event. That's what they said. They said they're going to give away a lambo. They said, we're going to have, this is our launch. This is the launch of the Cytomas we've been working on for months to deliver to you. We're changing finance. We're changing how you do finance. It's going to change the world. See, this is the root of a lot of this hype that we now reflect back on as unreasonable. But at the time, I was calling out, all right, you're going to launch the wallet. Okay. I looked at the wallet images. I wasn't very impressed, because the problem is that your wallet has to do something better than the competitors.
[00:10:46] Part of the problem with wallets in the space is almost every developer is focused on metamask, which is, I believe, the most.
[00:10:54] Not buggy, but it's terrible. It's a horrible wallet for the layman user.
[00:11:00] They straight said that they'll violate your privacy using it if you try to download it. It says, if you're on Apple, it says, yeah, we download all this data, we share it to the.
[00:11:08] But the reason that newbie traders get on metamask is because the devs tell you to do that, because you don't know any better. You don't know that there's other wallets out there that are actually better. They return, you know, they protect your privacy better, et cetera. So I'm looking at site mask thinking you're going to be in a crowd. There's all sorts of other wallets. You're not going to be able to compete with them. It's fine if you want to launch this, but to say you're basically tossing all your chips on one tool, that's what we're doing. And you're saying this wallet that's not that great looking is going to redefine finance and all this garbage. Okay, well, fine. So they did the Times Square thing, okay. Now, mind you, separately, all these other projects rebase tokens and reflection tokens. And all these things are spinning up as well. The concept of reflections, that was one of the big sell points for Saitama. This is right when reflections became a thing. For those that don't know, reflection is a mechanic that takes whatever is happening at the traffic level and it redistributes additional tokens to all existing wallet holders.
[00:12:17] The sell is, well, look, your wallet just grows. It just goes up. You don't have to do anything. As people buy and sell, your. Your amount goes up and you don't have to buy anymore. You don't have to go any further with yours. Little did people understand, which they now know, the reflection mechanic essentially was a dilution. A dilution in the sense that it didn't matter that you're getting additional tokens. What was happening was you were getting additional tokens that were lower value. So it kind of netted itself out. But the gamble part of this is, well, what happens when it climbs, right? The price is going to go up at a point. And so because you have more now, it's like you're stacking without having to pay more. So yes, it's netted out. It's the same balance and the same value. But when it climbs, you're going to be to the moon. Deep, deep, deep. They couple this. When I say they, I'm referring to all projects that did this. They coupled this then with a burn mechanic. The burn mechanic is not really a burn, as I've covered on multiple episodes. And I'll reiterate briefly here, because I think it's important for context. The burn mechanic is one of three ways to do it. First of all, the definition, when you burn, the concept is that you are removing them from circulation. You are making it to where they cannot be traded. You're making it to where it's like a. It's like a. No matter what, there can only be a certain amount of tokens ever in circulation, and that number will constantly decrease. That is the concept of a burn. One way to burn, which is the most common way, and the way I dislike the most, is to send them to what's referred to as a null address. The null address is a generic central address that exists on almost every blockchain, you know, and this, they send the tokens to that address with the statement that allegedly, quote, nobody can retrieve those tokens. We would learn this is 2021. Now, we would learn that there are some people that theoretically could retrieve the tokens. They just have simply not done so at this point.
[00:14:20] The second way to do the burn is to straight up burn them, which is an actual method in the contract that lets you destroy the tokens. So not only are you destroying them from the circulating supply, you are destroying them from the total supply, but you're only doing it as a method call. You're doing it as a call against whatever tokens are not currently held by people.
[00:14:46] This almost always increases price at a better rate than the first option, but it also gives you confidence that nobody can retrieve, that they literally do not exist anymore, and they cannot be retrieved. Assuming said contract is not a mint function, the third way to do it, which was just recently employed by the thorium team on the thorium V four token, this was earlier this year, late last year, is where you're burning straight off the total supply, including things that are held in people's wallets. You might think that's unconscionable. I agree with you, but that's how they did it. They would burn across the total supply. It didn't matter who's holding it. They would burn a percentage of whatever's out there. So let's say there's 5000 holders, and each one of them holds one token. So there's 5000 tokens that are out there sitting in wallets, and they run a method that says we want to burn 10% of whatever the total supply is.
[00:15:46] If there's 5000 tokens floating around, that means 500 tokens have to be burned. If there's 500 tokens that have to be burned across 5000 people, right, you can do the math on it.
[00:15:59] But they also would burn across whatever's left over that had not been distributed to people. So no matter what, this one is the most destructive. Although from a price perspective, it is the most volatile. It's going to result in an explosion in price, as thorium did. It started at, you know, a couple bucks and went all the way up to, I believe, like $40,000 at a peak. The problem and the flaw with the third method is nobody's going to buy if the price is too high. You and I, if you've listened for a while and you understand the game for a while, understand that price in cryptocurrency is kind of fake, because it's not like you have to buy one token or one coin. You can buy a fraction of it.
[00:16:40] Newbies don't understand that. They see a price, they react, right, normal. So if you price something too high, they're not going to, they're not likely to buy into it. It doesn't make any sense to them because to them they think they have to buy whole units. So back to Saitama. Saitama has the burn mechanic. Saitama has the reflection mechanic. The volume on Saitama is significant. So there are indeed reflections coming your way. And they are decently good. But the point is, it nets out. It's not like you're getting significant increase off of the reflections. The increase is coming from the volume. The volume of significant buys. What we didn't know at the time, so I'm talking July August ish timeframe 2021. What we didn't know at the time Saitama was funded largely off the backs of a select few major dollar players. We're talking millions and millions of dollars that were put in by a select few wealthy people to get the thing going.
[00:17:43] There's other stuff we would learn, which I'll cover on the tail end of our saga here. But right now, understand that what caused a lot of that front was not significant people as far as numbers. It was significant people as far as dollars. A select few people that had a lot of money dumped in it versus a significant number of people.
[00:18:07] Well, knowing this, in in hindsight, you can understand how fragile it is. If you've got just a select few people that dump a bunch of money in it. It means that if any one of them takes their money out, that project's going to be in the crapper, which is what eventually happened. But following more climbs and more runs, because now we have fomo. Fomo is fear of missing out for those new. It is a bunch of different people see that the thing is climbing up. A bunch of different people are seeing the green, and they're telling their friends, and they're spreading it through telescope. And the Shib communities are taking notice. And I. The floki communities are taking notice. And the Kishu community is taking notice. And all of these communities are taking notice. And so they're buying in. They're buying in. They're buying in. These are actually legit buyers. But the problem is that these are very low tier buyers. They might be tossing $10 because at the time, you could still get a million of it. Right? $10, you get a million of it or something. Some small amount of money.
[00:19:09] The myth is in their mind is, I'm going to just dump this in here and I'll be made a billionaire because of the grade of growth.
[00:19:17] What these people didn't understand, and we're not told is that at some point it was going to have to crash because you can never have a token. That's just going to constantly climb, climb, climb climb. Safe moon, which is right around in the same sphere had a very similar situation happen with it. Squid game is another one. Had a very similar situation. These are right around the same time span as what's going on here.
[00:19:44] Safemoon arguably had more success prior to its failure than Saitama did. But it was the same concept. It was one of the first to introduce those. But Safemoon. The trick with it is that they actually did launch a wallet that was functional. They actually did launch certain things that were functional. So it wasn't just based on the backs of certain wealthy players. They actually did a bunch of stuff. The flaw comparison flaw Safemoon versus Saitama Saitama wanted to try to get as many people on board and as much money in first before actually delivering solid products.
[00:20:25] Safemoon truly did have a bunch of shilling happening to get people in there. But I would argue in my opinion that Safemoon's delivery was a focus stronger than Saitama.
[00:20:38] You think that's weird because of what happened with Safemoon? I don't think it's weird at all. I'm saying that the people on safe moon were smarter people. Just. It's true. They were smarter people than what was on Saitama.
[00:20:52] Why?
[00:20:53] Saitama was started by a person called. Apparently her name is V. Y fam and v spun it up and at the time was unknown. What name was not broadcast, was not translated, but distributed a bunch of tokens to who would become the fronts for Saitama. Your rust cult leader Manfreight manning the hitman Nam Max and a couple of others distributed a bunch of the front end tokens to these people and then just abandoned the project. Did not want to be part of it. Eventually would go off. Spin up robo emu later. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole. Understand though v. Because I'll be revisiting the name later.
[00:21:40] So now these developers are sitting on large bags of this token where they've enticed large money players to pump the price of it. And that's enticed a level of fomo.
[00:21:54] Leading up to the failed November 13 event, I did a video online about confirmation bias.
[00:22:04] This is after the fact. This is. This is long after. But it's important because in that video I have snippets that I grabbed at the time just prior to the fail November 13 Vegas event about Christina, who is the wife of the cult leader. Talking about Mama's new whip, a new truck that they had bought just before the event land that they had bought just before the event. A Lambo Russ was putting out just before the event. And I said at the time, this is very tone deaf what you're doing because it's after. Now it's tone deaf what you're doing, because what you're essentially doing is rubbing in people's faces after it crashed, that you guys got enriched and living fat out the hog. I also said if they had those tokens, which came from V long before the pump, there's nothing wrong with them selling them for what it is that they did. The issue was they said they didn't sell for those things.
[00:23:01] Well, multiple people, including Faltron, I believe is one. Rodney, I believe is another one. We're talking about the fact that there's a number of cells coming from these sketchy wallets during the whole site of mass conversation. One of the projects that was allegedly going to get on board was Suzuki in you. Suzuki in you ended up being a rug pull. But the point is that Suzuki Inu was at least partially funded by Russ. He partially took some of the money that came from Saitama, too, and sent it to help fund this. And then it ended up being a rug pull.
[00:23:38] I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole. It's not worth it. Just understand there's more to this than just what's in the allegations. And I'm giving you some of this background as what I specifically saw myself, because I saw it around this time with the side of mask, we hit the failed November 13 Vegas event. I did not go to the event at the time I was in Vegas, and I didn't go to the event because I had a theory it wasn't going to go very well because of the people involved. Little did I know it would go even worse than what I even could speculate. The team asked Jake Gagain or Gagan, however you pronounce it. I say Gagne says spelt. But the team contacted Jake again as one of the people who was doing shill for. And he wasn't paid for it, I'm told, but doing shill for Saitama. And they asked him to come and run the event, basically be a hypester and film it. So I.
[00:24:43] I questioned the decision. I questioned the choice because Jake struck me as what we refer to as a mark. A mark is somebody that is easily coerced or convinced because there's so much of a fanboy and they cannot see beyond the fanboy ism at the time, that they're not suited for what it is you, if you're going to do an event such as that, you should want, ethically, you should want somebody who's not going to necessarily be your advocate. If you think back to some of the debate stages with former President Donald Trump, I would argue having Megyn Kelly across from him did him more good than harm because she would be critical, rightfully critical of certain things, and challenge him, openly challenge him. When he did the blood coming out of your waiver, she, she took it. She took it like a champ and then came back and she still welcomed him back on the show, still chatted with him. And ultimately, she became one of the supporters of him. And to vote for him, because if you can convince somebody who's critical of you about the merits of what you're doing in my position, it makes you stronger. It, it makes you feel confident in that person. You then have confidence as other investors are watching that didn't go to the event because let's say they're overseas or they're, they can't travel or why ever, or may just didn't want to do it or didn't have the money.
[00:26:10] You give them a sense of confidence. You took somebody who was even partially critical of what you were doing.
[00:26:18] You bring them in to run this event, to run this social, and you have them filming. You have them. It's like, we got nothing to hide. You know, come on in, interview us, talk to us. We'll show you stuff. You sell your greatest critic to make them your greatest advocate. See real business people. And for those that don't know, I am a business owner. I own four of them. Real business people understand the game. You understand that. That's what you're supposed to do. You're not supposed to simply coddle to the people that are kissing your ass. You're supposed to convert your greatest critics into your greatest supporters, because if you have the guts and the ability to do that, you stand out in a crowd. You then come the top of the mountain. And at the time, I warned, if you don't have that mask going, like you said on Times Square, this is going to be a catastrophic failure. And that may never recover from.
[00:27:14] So they bring in Jake, who, again, I considered a mark at the time, he's a mark at the time. He since has not been markish, but at the time, he was a mark. He would never talk about anything critical, negative, about the product, about the project, about the people. He simply would not.
[00:27:30] And I had my own doubts about why they chose him.
[00:27:34] Now, in the middle of all this. And I think it's slightly important, but not really. They enticed Willie D. Willie D's from Ghetto boys. They enticed him to come in as one of these advisors or whatever he was. I think they really just wanted his money. This is my theory. I have no evidence. I think they wanted his money. But they brought him in ostensibly to entice black people to invest in the project because they had a strong diversity. You know, they have Asians and Hispanics. I'm talking. They wanted to round out the diversity a little bit better than what they had been doing to try to get more blacks on board with this. Black Americans, at least on board of what this was doing. That turned out to be a failure as Willie D. Someone on the coin market cap side put up a banner that exposed Willie D's conviction. And it was literally a conviction, but it was fraud related.
[00:28:27] Now, the problem is, the conviction had already been out there, wasn't like it was new. So it was suspicious that all of a sudden I was put out there and Russ has a criminal record and nobody put a banner up on him.
[00:28:39] I'll get back to that, as far as the criminal record stuff.
[00:28:43] So when Jake is coming to this event, what I was. I saw brief snippets of something on. I think it was Instagram or something, but I was going off what people were saying, and I saw brief snippets of some stuff.
[00:28:55] The vast majority of people were saying. He was out walking around begging for more drinks. He was drunk off of his ass. He was not professional. He. His filming was garbage. You couldn't make out anything.
[00:29:09] Okay, so was I wrong when I said this guy's a mark? Because at that point, he just went to party. What we would learn later is that there would be no mask. The mask wasn't ready yet. And at the event this is now, at the event, they told people, we're just going to have this be a celebration. How many holders we got? You know, we don't have a mask, but we're here, so let's just have some fun. And there's a bunch of liquor and allegedly, I didn't prove this part, but allegedly, hookers and blow, as in cocaine? I couldn't confirm any of that. I'm saying, that's what I was told is there was a whole bunch of partying, aka somewhat of a freak off type without the sex. But I was told Floyd Mayweather stopped by. I was told there were hookers there. I was told. So it might be a freak off with just a bunch of nerds. I don't know.
[00:29:58] Ultimately, though, the price wasn't laughing at what happened because the price completely, completely tanked. What we would learn later is that some of the big money players from earlier were some of the bigger sell offs early on, they took their money back out. And one of those may have been Russ himself, cannot prove, saying, this is what we learned later, is that one of those may have been very well been Russ, due to what came out in the case documents.
[00:30:27] Allegedly, one of the big players, Doctor Praveen, went back to his hotel room, was buying more to try to hold the floor, try to hold the line on this business. We would learn later that Doctor Praveen would pair up with a couple of other doctors, and I think one of them was a pilot or something, take their money completely out after they saw that this wasn't going to work. And I'll get to that second and spin up what would become terrarium.
[00:30:56] I'll come back to that.
[00:30:58] Well, everything's crashing and burning. And I argue the crash and burn was preventable because leaving the Times Square banner talking about, they're going to have the mask, we're going to have the mask. The mask. I'll be there.
[00:31:11] Instead of just contacting the rotator and saying, we. We need to yank this or edit it, they'll let you do it. They just charge a charge. You have to ask for it, but they'll let you do it. Let's modify that banner, because we are not going to have that mask. It's not going to be ready. We're not ready to do this yet. Okay. Didn't do it. I don't know who it was that asked for the banner or if that person was just incompetent and didn't think about revoking it. I can't think of why that would be the case. Why wouldn't you think about yanking down the banner that's now misleading? I don't have that answer.
[00:31:42] So they didn't have the mask. They knew they weren't gonna have the mask days before the event because it wasn't ready. So they knew it wasn't gonna be ready, didn't tell anybody. People get to the event, they see it's. It's basically a freak off without sex and a bunch of nerds getting drunk. And Jake's nothing professional. And now people are connecting that he might be aligned with the project. He wasn't directly, but he was indirectly. And the unprofessional appearance of the event got people thinking these guys are just a bunch of scammers. They're just a bunch of jokers. They don't know what they're doing. And now we're seeing the chart react accordingly. They make promises that the mask is going through cerdic and all these things. And I gave a date in one of my updates that said, I don't think, I don't think cerdic is going to save you. And I suspect cert is going to take a while, but it should be reasonably quick. And if they can get the certic, this might get back on track. I just, I'm not confident they'll be able to do it leading into December. Then there's all this messaging about, I think it said, like, 30% done, surdic, 30% done, which causes more negative reaction on the chart because they're like, wait a minute. You just told us that the mask was at a point ready to go. We get to the event. It's not even ready, much less available to show it's not ready to go. Now you're telling us Cerdix almost done, but we see that they're saying 30%. What the heck's going on? I had a couple of people make excuses for certic saying that Cerdix slammed, and they got a lot going on. There's a lot of, you know, these are excuses because at the end of the day, it does not take cerdic that long to do a lot of these things. Chances are, and I speculated chances are cerdic found a bunch of stuff that was wrong and they kicked it back. You know, homework back in school. Nope. Go back, do it again. That's what I think happened. I think that they put out a piece of garbage and sort of called him out on it without publicly calling him out on it. And just in private said, we're 30% of the way, but we're not going to be dishonest about it.
[00:33:40] We get to, I believe it was January, February 1 of these timeframes, 2022.
[00:33:45] There's an initial version of Cytomask released. So it's past verdict. Something's put out. Now, I took a look at it because I work technology for a living, and I know what to look for. Blatant things. I'm not going deep into the code or any of this, just blatant usability things, user experience things, blatant holes or gaps in the solution. Right. The first thing I noticed, and I called it out and I put it on, on twitter, telling people to stay away from this garbage, it's connecting to testnet. So the problem that, you know, if you connect your wallet to this, your regular main net wallet to this business and it's doing transactions against Testnet, you might lose your tokens. And I didn't want that to happen to anybody. So I instantly called out, this toggle does not let you change it from testnet to Mainnet and you could risk losing some tokens on this. Did you even Qa this business? There's no way you could have, they chime back and say, oh, that's, that's my design. That was intentional. That's bullshit. I'm sorry. I say that now. I said it then.
[00:34:49] Any competent developer would not throw out and say this is live, but force it defaulted to testnet and then make it to where you cannot disable testnet. And you're telling me that was by design? It was bullshit. I knew it was bullshit. I have an ethical obligation to call it out for bullshit, period, point blank.
[00:35:12] Later they acknowledge, okay, there's a bug with this, don't front.
[00:35:17] This is so the charts reacting again because it's like, don't front. You're fronting and it's exposing you. The pants are down and the vaselines off the side. These are silly mistakes. You presented a professional front leading up to the failed November 13 event and you're getting exposed on some of this. And you're not just running and saying, thank you for calling us out. We appreciate that what you did. But also use QA like it's a basic 101 and you don't do that either. So I'm already having misgivings and I'm telling people I recommend staying away from this business.
[00:35:52] They release another version, all of a sudden there's connection issues and authentication issues. And what they said was, we're under a DDoS attack. For those not technically inclined, a DDoS attack, distributed denial of service is what it refers to. A DDoS attack in the simplest form is you have a whole bunch of whatever's. They could be bots that are automated, they could be people on computers. It doesn't matter. The point is you're doing more transactions hammering a server than what the server can handle. The server will purposely shut itself down to protect itself from further attack. So it's referred to as a DDoS attack. You're denying service to the customers, the legitimate customers trying to use this channel now whether they were under a DDoS attack or not, I theorize they were not under a DDoS attack at all. I theorized that they might have left things that the configuration for their server side was just jacked up to where they didn't. You're supposed to configure the server in such a way that it has a controlled conduit. Like you would never have a server that is designed to front some sort of application, and you're allowing communication from all across the spectrum. That doesn't make any sense, because if you know that the server is purpose built for this application that you just built, you should scope it to only accept communications from that application, and then you should build in hooks that enforce that. And they didn't do that. And so what happens is, I'll give a great example. I have two clients that I've worked with. Now, for the clients, they are United States based clients, but they are or related to government.
[00:37:33] And with the government related entities, what happens is you get random attacks from international. They're trying to hack in, and it's constant. It's a constant barrage of attacks. Now we on the, on the low level, we don't see it because there have been layers and layers on your perimeter designed to detect and block those attack attempts and breach attempts. So when we as workers hear that, okay, this service over here got breached somehow, well, we have to do analysis about how did that happen because it's so rare. We have to try to understand, was it something that that person left open? Was it bad code? Was it some sort of vulnerability? Was it a virus? And it takes methodical research to understand how one could have gotten in because it's so rare. So when they announced this DDoS attack, I'm skeptical. Multiple people are skeptical. There's a person named Teddy Ganja on Twitter. He went over to the Shinja scam. But Teddy ganja at the time, he knows the server back in, which is AWS, which is Amazon Web services. I'm not going to bore you. The technology. Suffice to say, he knows the how that technology works and the different options available for the perimeter security that I described. AWS has certain default things available to it that help protect the server stack like I described. So Teddy's even saying, no, you got AWS. It's not ddos, you got aws. Stop saying, stop saying DDoS. Because he knows what I suspected, which is there's no way unless you're a blistering it, because it's possible you didn't enable those things, but why wouldn't you? And AWS has certain default protections in place. So that opens up another theory that they might have removed default protections because they couldn't get it to work with the protections in place, which is a code related problem. It's not a server problem if your application cannot work with certain protections. It's a code issue, not a server issue. That was my theory. I can't prove it because I can't see the server. But they're squawking about ddos as people can't authenticate, can't get in, can't log in, getting kicked out. Meanwhile, the charts reacting over and over. It's not. It's a non stop now. Terrarium starts to become a thing. This is the doctors that were some of the early rich money that went into Saitama. Terrarium starts to be a thing, starts to spin and spin and it's starting to grow a little bit. It's not anywhere near like what Satama was. Essentially, you have cast offs from Saitama going to terrarium because they're disgruntled with Saitama. You have most of the people, I would argue that failed off Saitama. They went to that cult now, which is garbage. And some I know went back to shiv and just said. And some just said, screw you, bro. I'm out of it. Some of them didn't even know. Some of them just swore off the wallet and figured, okay, in three years I'll be a millionaire. And then here in 2024, they dial in and they see there's three different variations of what. What they call Saitama. And then a Cita chain. And they'll know what that is because this is where I'm going now. At some point they determine. So they finally get the frickin mask working to a basic degree. I still said, I'm not going to touch it because I already know it's a nightmare.
[00:40:50] Later they say, all right, we're going to go to the Cytopro business, which. And swap. They're doing a swap inside a pro. And then they're starting to talk about all these other different things they had planned to do this fang, which is nft nonsense, and the cider card and cider.edu. and they're starting to roll out the side of realty because they wanted to get that going. And on the side, Lillian finance, which was supposed to be on the wallet. So it's supposed to be there at the fail November 13 event, supposedly the first one on there in December. They had said, we can't wait anymore. You can't get this together. We're just going to go to uniswap. And launch and get this going. I'm not going to go down the rabbit hole of fiasco. Suffice to say, that launch was a catastrophic nightmare at the time. Somebody had gotten access to the wallet early and jacked up the price. They jacked up the liquidity in a way that a lot of people were. Their money was taken before they. It's like a front run.
[00:41:51] Del rug pull a k. Del Crypto was in there at the time. I can't say he was the one that caused it. I can tell you that he was in there at the time. So that launch was jacked up. I said, you should. You should relaunch. Because this is not fair to everybody who's in it. They refuse to do it. It's a whole different rabbit hole with lillian finance. Suffice to say, they were supposed to be on site. A mask. It didn't happen because of what happened at the failed November 13 Vegas event. So now Brad Beanie's involved in this whole fiasco. The doctor, Praveen terrarium, Milton Terrarium. They're involved in this fiasco. Suzuki people are involved in this fiasco. Robo any is involved in it. Like, do you see how we have this hub spoke, connected chaos of nonsense. And it all comes back to Saitama at the end of the day.
[00:42:36] Now they're starting to roll out the side of realty. They said, we're gonna go on a side of mass or cider pro, whatever. They're gonna roll off the site of realty. Well, they couldn't do it. It wasn't ready. They had a whole bunch of issues. They couldn't get to work. So they said, okay, we're gonna roll this out on frickin uniswap, like everything else. And they were pissed off. But that's what it was. They couldn't get the frickin tool to work as again. Months ago I told people, this isn't ready. You're telling them it's ready. It's not ready. You're making yourself look worse. And the charts reacting accordingly. And you're not hearing what I'm saying. So they're the site of logistics and other things. They're just spinning up new shinies. They're not really solving the core problem, which is the Saitama token. As I covered in my coverage.
[00:43:18] Now v two starts to become a chatter. They're going to launch a v two because apparently there's problems with the original contract. Now, the first contract, it was renounced. Liquidity was locked. But they said that they needed to have access to the liquidity to do some stuff. This is after they've already burned their bridges with the failed November 13 Vegas event. So now they're going to launch a v two. People are pissed off. They don't know what's going on. What the heck? Why are we doing that? Mind you, this is ethereum, and gas prices are still essentially sky high, but they're just, they're just barreling forward. They're not stopping to think about a better way to solve the problem because they're just reacting at this point. And I theorized at the time somebody was telling them to do it that did not have their best interest at heart.
[00:44:00] They said that they're going to do airdrops of the v two to everybody. A vast majority of people did not get v two airdrops. I speculate now, and, you know, now that I think about it, I speculate that the real reason they wanted to go to v two was to flush out certain of the early investors that were in that situation to block them away and then reset the price to where they could buy back in off the proceeds and do it again. I can't say that's what happened. That's a theory. Point is, they start to allegedly start to do these airdrops. There was a white paper that described what they were going to do with this airdrop strategy, and it specifically said, we're not going to make it live until everybody has received their tokens, quote, no wolfpack member left behind. That's right. In the document, they said in the middle of the rollout of this airdrop, they turned it live. They made it live, active, traded. So then, now there's some climb, but there's some people who haven't got their tokens yet.
[00:44:59] Turns out the gas was too dang high. They refused to pay the increase in gas. It was too high. The gas was already spiking. It didn't make any sense. But the real question was why they turned the contract live. Later we would learn that the reason that they did that was they wanted to use the taxes to help pay for the distribution for the airdrops. They never told anybody this. This was just things that they're reacting again, doing after the fact. So the charts. Reacting again. It did the climb, and that's going to crap again.
[00:45:32] It's, it's just a persistent. It's on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. And I'm going to skip past some of the garbage, because it didn't matter. You know, like they did do the side of logistics. They did decide a realty. It doesn't really matter. I'm going to skip past the garbage. Point is we get to this day where this cult of sub, cult of people, Faltron and Kelbel and some others, get together with Christina, who's the wife of the cult leader, because apparently there's divorce proceedings happening between them. Christina's outing russ as a coke cokehead, saying that he's in Dubai with what apparently was her friend that he had an affair with, you know, behind Christina's back. And she is then dropping this dirt to Faltron, who's running, running a victory lap. And somebody in that room asked, it was a female and it might have been Kelbel, but I don't know. But as a female said, in Christina, in your opinion, do you think Saitama is a scam? And Christina said, yes. Question was, in your opinion? Well, somebody in the room said something to the effect of, well, there you have it. Saddam's a scam. And I said, that's confirmation bias because what you're doing is you're accepting her word blindly. And you said it was her opinion, that's fine. But she was right there. She was right alongside him. She was. She was flashing the truck and the land. She was right there. She could have said something long ago. She could have said something before the Vegas event. If she really ethically believed to do the right thing. She could have said something. If she did, I'm sorry. That makes her just as suspect as him. I wasn't absolving him. Cult leader. I'm saying she's just as bad. Why are you listening to her? But these are, these are bottom feeders that simply just want the dirt. That's all they want. That's all they care about. Confirmation bias. They wanted their own bias to be proven and they got no proof because she's doing the same thing that he was doing. That was my beef on this.
[00:47:33] After this, then we see an alert on Twitter that Russ is out, that, you know, Max had been fired because he couldn't get the wire, the wallet done. Matt, you know, Russ is out. Nom's out. All these people are out. And Manny the hitman man, Preet Coley is going to take over and he's going to spin up and convert over to this side of chain so that he does this rebrand and he's relaunched all this stuff. And they do an airdrop. They do an airdrop on the binance smart chain, presumably to avoid the gas related issues from before.
[00:48:06] So they drop a bunch of tokens through the binance smart chain to everybody's wallet. They then start pushing on all the other stuff that was talked about, the side of card and the swaps and everything, to try to fix it and get it up on scratch. And then allegedly they're going to work to buy to try to get, drum up some interest and drum some hype and, and do it correctly, they launch a layer zero blockchain. I said, what good is a blockchain? First of all, you got to convince somebody to use it. And freaking Shib couldn't convince somebody to use theirs. And they got 2 million holders. They got barely any use. We don't need another blockchain. So why are you doing it? I understand it was always part of the roadmap. I'm asking, why do you need it? We don't need it. There's no use.
[00:48:50] What I would have done is partner up with Shibdeh on what they were doing with the blockchain to create a joint blockchain, maybe, but I wouldn't launch a separate one. It doesn't make any sense because you haven't justified why we should use it.
[00:49:03] They launched it anyway. It's out there. There is a layer zero blockchain for cytochain. But after they launched the blockchain, they had the old Satama people holding cite a chain coin on the Ethereum chain. Still, this was, this is how bad this went. So when they did this drop, they did the drop through the binance smart chain. But they still had people on the Ethereum holding the old Saitama. They just went in and told all the different distributors and the, the makers and the communication points to rename what was Saitama in this case, a v three or v two, as v three into Citus chain, just rename it in place. So if you already had Satama sitting in the wallet from a previous airdrop is my point, they just renamed it. That made everything confusing because now you got a binance variant and an Ethereum variant and they didn't overlap. And then the, the vast majority of Ethereum holders did not receive the Ethereum. They received the binance one, but there were still people holding the Ethereum one. I was one of them.
[00:50:13] That's how I know how this fiasco works. I got the binance drop and I got an Ethereum drop because I saw what they did. The rename was the problem. I don't think they should have done that. It should have been a completely different project. But I knew what they were doing. They were trying to bank off of the existing holders, which we would learn later are largely dust wallets. So now we get.
[00:50:35] We get a notice that apparently they're going to effectively rug pull the liquidity from Uniswap as you swap first, I believe. So they're going to rug pull liquidity. Rug pull, in the sense that they're going to remove the yank and liquidity. Not just that, but also block trades through that conduit. You cannot trade on the Ethereum side at all. Will not work. So you still had them. They're stuck there. There's nothing you can do. You can't even go to their tool for the Ethereum side. On the binance side, they rug pulled pancake swap.
[00:51:10] I'm like, why? Why would you do that? That's the main conduit for people trading on the binance smart chain. They said, you got to come to our, you know, Cytopro or Cytoswap or whatever it is, to trade finance.
[00:51:23] I.
[00:51:25] I said, the guy's an idiot. They don't want this to succeed because these are bad decisions. They don't make any sense at all. In the middle of all this fiasco, gate IO was not able to swap people's tokens over to the new side of chain. So they sent out a message saying, sorry, you're going to have to talk to them, but for right now, we're just going to let you trade the old Saitama because we can't do the trade. We can't get the tokens from them. And it's a finger pointing. So there's a. There's a back and forth chaos with how Manny the hitman did it, where I kept saying he doesn't want to succeed because this doesn't make any sense of what they're doing.
[00:51:59] That finally got resolved later.
[00:52:02] Fast forward, though.
[00:52:04] Now you're forced. They have the SBC token, which nobody coined, which nobody's using, because nobody's on the chain, because it just launched. Nobody's on it. People are trying to trade on binance. They can't. They don't know because they're not in the bubble.
[00:52:18] Then we get this notification about this business. There's other projects like VZZ and others involved. I'm not going to bore it, but the point is we get this notification about the case being filed against Manny and Russ and Nam and Max and all this around Saitama and cytochain. And for those that are naysaying. Cytochain was named in the indictment. You can see it yourself. So, yes, cytochain is involved, your tokens involved. As a result, it craps completely and rightfully. So.
[00:52:47] I want to come back now to Lillian finance.
[00:52:52] When Lillian finance branches off and the initial launch is a catastrophic failure. It's a, it's an absolute nightmare. Failure.
[00:53:01] Leaves had advocated for at the time, Brad, as well as Barney Wilker and the project. And he has multiple videos where he said, no, I believe in this team. Yeah, I believe in the project. There they went up and they did.
[00:53:17] He adamantly supported them.
[00:53:19] I did multiple coverages where I said, you know, medical blockchain is a thing. That's certainly a thing. Whether this team can pull that off is in question. I'm not confident that they could do it, but medical blockchain is the thing. So I'm trying to be fair in the concept of what is happening. And I wanted to correct one message, which was, he never said, brad, that he was trying to do it to get money for his kid. He said he was trying to do it for others, not to go through what he went through, how legit he is. I didn't say, I don't know. I'm simply saying that what was stated that he said wasn't true. And I wanted to clarify what he really said, which is, I'm, you know, I want to do this, try to help people out. No problem.
[00:53:59] When the whole fiasco with Lillian starts to hit a pitch, is Brad already had a criminal record for fraud.
[00:54:07] Now, people called it out and they said at points, okay, he's dumping on the project. He's dumping that up. Leaves himself directly, said, I remember the video. I'll, I'll, you know, he said, brad, the Beatles cashed out, which is not true. He was talking to somebody else. It was true. He was cashing out. He was selling out the project. We would learn later that not only was he selling off the project, he was doing on a regular basis, but please was his ardent defender. Now, he might say, well, I didn't know. I understand that. My point only is you got to be called out because you did not own to say, I ardently defended this guy. Whether or not I knew, I should not have been so ardent in my defense, and I should have been skeptical because I could not have known for sure.
[00:54:56] This is the problem with overlapping the words friend and crypto, because in cryptocurrency you cannot have this concept of friends. It doesn't exist. Everything is business transaction. And in a business transaction, the best thing you can do is to look for critical. You criticize, you do not befriend because they're going to stab you in the back because it's all a profit driven business at the end of the day.
[00:55:23] So then when the case is filed, this is case FBI, right. DOJ, NSCC, all because they considered Saitama security. Now, you didn't see any news articles about Satomas insecurity, some scared from Gary Gensler. You didn't see any of that stuff. It just went right.
[00:55:38] I theorize that's theory, that they did that on purpose, that they did that because they wanted to trap these guys, because they ended up creating a fake token. Did the FBI fake token? Next, something AI to trap Russ, who was caught in channels admitting he was watch trading.
[00:55:57] So. So they acknowledged Satama was a security sec and they said, this is why we need to go after them, because it's a security, but also because of the wash training. Because the wash train is illegal. As I said, it's illegal to do that. Well, you might think a lot of projects do that. Yeah, they do. But not a lot of projects are stupid enough to create an llc that gives all the information about the owners of the business while you're doing it. This is why I wanted people to understand when I said they're just stupid. That's, that's what they are. They're stupid. They're incompetent. Because that was the. I was obvious to me. It's obvious to anybody runs a business that these guys are incompetent. Didn't matter that Russ went to business, you know, classes in UoP. It didn't matter because he certainly didn't absorb whatever it was he learned during those classes because these are obviously, they're just stupid. I knew that, though. So that's why I stayed at a distance and did not fall into the mark behavior that Jake did. And I was not an adamant defender like blease was. I was more on the critical side because I was seeing silly errors that made no sense and people getting harmed along the way. Well, when this case, and there's a lot in the case, and I'll do a part two, but in the case, it talks about some of the cells that happened, of some of the tokens, and I was staggered to see so much money that these people took, you know, and, and some of the claims that they made that were just simply not true. We knew some of that. But the document exposes a lot. It exposes a lot. And I still have people on the YouTube side who swear, no, it's fake news. It's fake news, but it's fake and buying the dip. I am staggered at the level of cult of some of these people. This is Stockholm syndrome. That's the definition of Stockholm syndrome. If you can't look at a court document from the FBI linked from Justice Dot gov and you still think it's fake, this, folks, as I wrap up part one of this saga, this is the problem we have in cryptocurrency. This is what all of us have to do a better job breaking. This is what we have to help people avoid falling into the trap that is these cults. I know that there's still people in the cult of safe moon, I understand. But this is even worse because you have a court filing telling you these people fleeced you and took your money and you're still believing and you're still buying the dip on a project whose leadership was indicted for these crimes. We have to do a better job keeping people away from this scummy, sketchy garbage. All of us have to do a better job of it. That's the whole point of my channel. I started, and I actually started it in 2021 to try to help avoid some of this stuff. And I think I've done a passable job. At least there's one or two where I might have recommended and then it failed. But never to the degree there was a scam like this one. You never will catch one of those because they're obvious on the face. So I am staggered. I'm shocked. But that was the high level summary of what I personally experienced and what I personally saw. Part two is going to dig into the actual case documents a little bit further so you understand how deep the rabbit hole goes and how brilliant, frankly, the government was in trapping these people to try to keep people safe. And I'll talk about the forum that's out there for them to understand. If you were taken for a ride and my recommendations about said forum, which may surprise you, but I take a different stance than most people. Suffice to say, I think it's good justice was served. I think it changes a bit on precedent. I think we need to understand how this affects the larger cryptocurrency space, and I think we need to understand better based on cases like this, you know, the other projects that do similar things and what might happen with them and how do we get it to where we clean the space up a little bit better? But also, I'm going to be in part two, hooking a little bit into ethereum and the idiot Vitalik, because some information was resurfaced that I want to talk about. That I think connects nicely to this fiasco where it's a larger issue, because Ethereum is where Satama was right, and the gas spiking during the time and a lot of the wealth was on the ethereum side in terms of how much the liquidity pool. Well, how does idiot Vindelik possibly intersect that? And how is it possible now? We don't see anywhere near that level of influence after it changed to proof of stake. I got more on that. This data.
[01:00:44] I think this, these two, these two episodes are going to be doing. They've got to be crowning achievements for the channel, cryptotalk FM, by the way. They've got to be crowning achievements for the channel. Simply the level of depth that we're going and the level of quality we're going. I mean, it makes me upset that my freaking studio is not done yet, because I really wish I could interact on these things. But I will say, you know, can leave comments down below. Hit us on the forum, crypto talk FM. Hit the contacts. We do want to hear what you have to think. If you were in this garbage, hit us up, let us know. But we're going to wrap up part one here. Part two, once again, is going to focus on the case documents, specifically the case documents, and then the bridge over to idiot Videlice.
